Need help picking a 4K TV - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 7Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 34 Old 06-18-2017, 05:57 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Posts: 15
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 21 Post(s)
Liked: 0
Need help picking a 4K TV

Hello,

I am in market to buy a brand new TV for my basement. I would be watching 60% Movies/TV and 40% Gaming. I also need the capability to watch movies through the TV from my USB Hard drive. I have a Samsung TV that plays almost all my MKVs. Looking at the new TVs, I can't tell what brands would allow me to play mkv files containing 4K content and all different audio types embedded in the file (dolby, DTS, DTS-HD, True HD, Atmos). I believe only the LG 2017 models support Atmos, is that correct?

I have looked at the following TVs and like them: Samsung 65" MU9000 and Sony 65" X930E. I really don't want to spend anymore then 3000 but rather only spend 2500 dollars.

Please advice and help.
harshal324 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 34 Old 06-18-2017, 06:22 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
checker9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 2,004
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1389 Post(s)
Liked: 316
Quote:
Originally Posted by harshal324 View Post
Hello,

I am in market to buy a brand new TV for my basement. I would be watching 60% Movies/TV and 40% Gaming. I also need the capability to watch movies through the TV from my USB Hard drive. I have a Samsung TV that plays almost all my MKVs. Looking at the new TVs, I can't tell what brands would allow me to play mkv files containing 4K content and all different audio types embedded in the file (dolby, DTS, DTS-HD, True HD, Atmos). I believe only the LG 2017 models support Atmos, is that correct?

I have looked at the following TVs and like them: Samsung 65" MU9000 and Sony 65" X930E. I really don't want to spend anymore then 3000 but rather only spend 2500 dollars.

Please advice and help.
I do not know anything about the ability to play those files but if the Sony X900E can, you should consider it over the MU9000. It is better TV (brighter, more colors, better motion etc.) and it is cost less. The X930E is reviewed better than the X900E and it will get Dolby Vision, which the X900E will not, but cost about $1000 more for the 65 inch version.

You also might be able to find a 2016 LG OLED C6 or B6 for under $3K. Stores are clearing them, and sometimes you can find new ones, from authorized dealers, for low $2000s. Warning though: there are increasing reports of people getting permanent burn-on on them, so it would be risky for gaming. That is why I am not getting one (actually returned one.)
harshal324 likes this.
checker9 is offline  
post #3 of 34 Old 06-18-2017, 06:28 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
checker9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 2,004
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1389 Post(s)
Liked: 316
Also if you can find a 2016 KS8000 Samsung that would be great value as remaining ones are going for ~$1500. Th 2016 KS line is equivalent to the Q series this year - the MU is actually a lower TV (sales people will tell you they are similar though.)
harshal324 likes this.
checker9 is offline  
 
post #4 of 34 Old 06-19-2017, 07:48 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Posts: 15
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 21 Post(s)
Liked: 0
Quote:
Originally Posted by checker9 View Post
Also if you can find a 2016 KS8000 Samsung that would be great value as remaining ones are going for ~$1500. Th 2016 KS line is equivalent to the Q series this year - the MU is actually a lower TV (sales people will tell you they are similar though.)
I can't seem to find KS8000 or KS9000 anywhere (authorized dealer that is). Do you know any place that still has it?
harshal324 is offline  
post #5 of 34 Old 06-19-2017, 08:23 PM
Advanced Member
 
sk373's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 549
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 266 Post(s)
Liked: 398
Quote:
Originally Posted by harshal324 View Post
I can't seem to find KS8000 or KS9000 anywhere (authorized dealer that is). Do you know any place that still has it?
Awesome deal here on a 75" KS9000, authorized Samsung dealer:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/322316472137

I almost pulled the trigger myself, but I got a Sony X900e instead.
harshal324 likes this.

My humble system:

Sony X900e; Sony UBP-X800; Pioneer Elite BDP-62FD universal blu-ray player; Denon 4300H AVR, Dual PSA S1801's; Monitor Audio Silver RX-6 mains, RX center, and RX surrounds; one pair NHT mini Atmos speakers; Home-built HTPC (Xeon E1230, 16gb RAM, Crucial M500 480gb SSD, GeForce 980Ti, Corsair CX600, CoolerMaster mini-ITX case)
sk373 is offline  
post #6 of 34 Old 06-20-2017, 06:00 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
checker9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 2,004
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1389 Post(s)
Liked: 316
Quote:
Originally Posted by harshal324 View Post
I can't seem to find KS8000 or KS9000 anywhere (authorized dealer that is). Do you know any place that still has it?
The KS TV probably cannot be found now unless you got lucky with a retailer having one left. I have one and I also tried a Sony X900E. They are very similar, with the KS being slightly better for daytime viewing and the Sony slightly better for night time viewing.

Definitely get the Sony over the MU.
harshal324 likes this.
checker9 is offline  
post #7 of 34 Old 06-21-2017, 10:29 AM - Thread Starter
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Posts: 15
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 21 Post(s)
Liked: 0
$3500, seems a little high for last year's model?

How much did you pay for the Sony X900e 65"?

Quote:
Originally Posted by sk373 View Post
Awesome deal here on a 75" KS9000, authorized Samsung dealer:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/322316472137

I almost pulled the trigger myself, but I got a Sony X900e instead.
harshal324 is offline  
post #8 of 34 Old 06-21-2017, 10:44 AM
Advanced Member
 
sk373's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 549
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 266 Post(s)
Liked: 398
Quote:
Originally Posted by harshal324 View Post
$3500, seems a little high for last year's model?

How much did you pay for the Sony X900e 65"?
That isn't high at all for a 75" KS9000, which is every bit is as good as this year's Sammy QLED sets, according to the reviews. I paid $1,999 for my 65" X900e.
harshal324 likes this.

My humble system:

Sony X900e; Sony UBP-X800; Pioneer Elite BDP-62FD universal blu-ray player; Denon 4300H AVR, Dual PSA S1801's; Monitor Audio Silver RX-6 mains, RX center, and RX surrounds; one pair NHT mini Atmos speakers; Home-built HTPC (Xeon E1230, 16gb RAM, Crucial M500 480gb SSD, GeForce 980Ti, Corsair CX600, CoolerMaster mini-ITX case)
sk373 is offline  
post #9 of 34 Old 06-22-2017, 09:15 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
bobknavs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Danbury, CT, USA
Posts: 1,064
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 552 Post(s)
Liked: 447
Quote:
Originally Posted by harshal324 View Post
$3500, seems a little high for last year's model?

(snip)
It's all relative. Check the price on a 2017 75" Q7. (At BB, $5k.)

It's not clear that the Q7 is superior to the KS9000 in any way.
harshal324 likes this.
bobknavs is offline  
post #10 of 34 Old 06-22-2017, 11:37 AM - Thread Starter
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Posts: 15
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 21 Post(s)
Liked: 0
What I meant is that I have seen the same TV for $3000 (when I was not in the market to buy a TV). I would assume that as time continues and given the TV model is discontinued the price would drop.
harshal324 is offline  
post #11 of 34 Old 06-22-2017, 11:47 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2017
Posts: 392
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 243 Post(s)
Liked: 28
The X930E is the best edge-lit TV for 2017!!! There is no way you should consider another edge-lit set over this
sahil0909 is online now  
post #12 of 34 Old 06-22-2017, 01:07 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
bobknavs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Danbury, CT, USA
Posts: 1,064
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 552 Post(s)
Liked: 447
Quote:
Originally Posted by harshal324 View Post
What I meant is that I have seen the same TV for $3000 (when I was not in the market to buy a TV). I would assume that as time continues and given the TV model is discontinued the price would drop.
Hard to get that from what you posted, at least for me.

Price drops? Hard to predict.

For example, if memory serves, BestBuy had the LG 55" B6 OLED set on a Black Friday sale last year for $1500. That model was far from being discontinued at that time.
harshal324 likes this.
bobknavs is offline  
post #13 of 34 Old 06-22-2017, 02:12 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Posts: 15
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 21 Post(s)
Liked: 0
Is it worth getting X930E over X900E specially that is cost $1000 more?

Quote:
Originally Posted by sahil0909 View Post
The X930E is the best edge-lit TV for 2017!!! There is no way you should consider another edge-lit set over this
harshal324 is offline  
post #14 of 34 Old 06-22-2017, 02:35 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
bobknavs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Danbury, CT, USA
Posts: 1,064
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 552 Post(s)
Liked: 447
Quote:
Originally Posted by harshal324 View Post
Is it worth getting X930E over X900E specially that is cost $1000 more?
The 900E isn't edge lit. It's FALD (but with relatively few zones).

I know little about it, but it is not supposed to receive a DV (Dolby vision) upgrade, should you care about that.
bobknavs is offline  
post #15 of 34 Old 06-22-2017, 02:38 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2017
Posts: 392
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 243 Post(s)
Liked: 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by harshal324 View Post
Is it worth getting X930E over X900E specially that is cost $1000 more?
It depends on your usage. What is the most important thing you want in a TV? HDR? Then yes the X930E is worth it for HDR. And if you're going to use it mainly in a bright room then yes definitely get the X930E. Because even though the X930E is edge-lit, the local dimming performs even better than the full array local dimming on the X900E thanks to the slim backlight drive +, and this has been found by reviewers. So in short, if you just want a good TV at a good price and don't care for the best of the best, then get the X900E, but if you want the best for HDR, then definitely get the X930E. It's a beast
sahil0909 is online now  
post #16 of 34 Old 06-22-2017, 02:47 PM
Advanced Member
 
sk373's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 549
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 266 Post(s)
Liked: 398
Quote:
Originally Posted by sahil0909 View Post
It depends on your usage. What is the most important thing you want in a TV? HDR? Then yes the X930E is worth it for HDR. And if you're going to use it mainly in a bright room then yes definitely get the X930E. Because even though the X930E is edge-lit, the local dimming performs even better than the full array local dimming on the X900E thanks to the slim backlight drive +, and this has been found by reviewers. So in short, if you just want a good TV at a good price and don't care for the best of the best, then get the X900E, but if you want the best for HDR, then definitely get the X930E. It's a beast
Yes, the X930e is brighter than the X900e. However, the X900e is more than bright enough for a bright room, and performs well in HDR. The main reason to get an X930e over an X900e is for Dolby Vision, which IMHO isn't worth another $1,000.

My humble system:

Sony X900e; Sony UBP-X800; Pioneer Elite BDP-62FD universal blu-ray player; Denon 4300H AVR, Dual PSA S1801's; Monitor Audio Silver RX-6 mains, RX center, and RX surrounds; one pair NHT mini Atmos speakers; Home-built HTPC (Xeon E1230, 16gb RAM, Crucial M500 480gb SSD, GeForce 980Ti, Corsair CX600, CoolerMaster mini-ITX case)
sk373 is offline  
post #17 of 34 Old 06-22-2017, 04:06 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2017
Posts: 392
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 243 Post(s)
Liked: 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by sk373 View Post
Yes, the X930e is brighter than the X900e. However, the X900e is more than bright enough for a bright room, and performs well in HDR. The main reason to get an X930e over an X900e is for Dolby Vision, which IMHO isn't worth another $1,000.
The X900E being 'bright enough' is your opinion with all due respect. According to the UHD premium alliance the minimum required brightness is 1000 nits. Am i saying the X900E won't be great for HDR? No. What i'm saying is since Brightness is a Crucial element in HDR, you classifying the brightness difference between the X930E and the X900E (It's almost double the brightness!) as 'not a main reason to get the X930E over the X900E is very misleading!' Since that is the main reason to get it over the X900E, that accompanied by dolby vision and the X1 EXTREME PROCESSOR. Everyone who knows about HDR and the requirements will tell you that
sahil0909 is online now  
post #18 of 34 Old 06-22-2017, 04:12 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
checker9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 2,004
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1389 Post(s)
Liked: 316
Quote:
Originally Posted by sahil0909 View Post
The X900E being 'bright enough' is your opinion with all due respect. According to the UHD premium alliance the minimum required brightness is 1000 nits. Am i saying the X900E won't be great for HDR? No. What i'm saying is since Brightness is a Crucial element in HDR, you classifying the brightness difference between the X930E and the X900E (It's almost double the brightness!) as 'not a main reason to get the X930E over the X900E is very misleading!' Since that is the main reason to get it over the X900E, that accompanied by dolby vision and the X1 EXTREME PROCESSOR. Everyone who knows about HDR and the requirements will tell you that

Many miss the point of what brightness means for HDR.

As HDTVTest put it in article about low peak brightness being challenging for good HDR: http://www.hdtvtest.co.uk/news/oled-...1612214392.htm

This is the point where some misguided OLED owners will put forth the argument that “I don’t need more brightness; 300/ 400/ 500 nits already nearly blinded me” or “1000 nits? I don’t want to wear sunglasses when I’m watching TV!”. To clarify, this extra capacity of peak brightness is applied not to the whole picture, but only to selective parts of the HDR image – specifically specular highlights – so that reflections off a shiny surface can look more realistic, creating a greater sense of depth and insight. The higher the peak brightness, the more bright highlight details that can be resolved and reproduced with clarity, and the more accurate the displayed image is relative to the original creative intent.

As an example/ imagine the following shot being a small part of an overall scene in HDR. High peak brightness being able to accent the light, would make a shot like this have more depth and be more 3D-like:


Last edited by checker9; 06-22-2017 at 04:21 PM.
checker9 is offline  
post #19 of 34 Old 06-22-2017, 04:15 PM
Advanced Member
 
sk373's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 549
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 266 Post(s)
Liked: 398
Quote:
Originally Posted by sahil0909 View Post
The X900E being 'bright enough' is your opinion with all due respect. According to the UHD premium alliance the minimum required brightness is 1000 nits. Am i saying the X900E won't be great for HDR? No. What i'm saying is since Brightness is a Crucial element in HDR, you classifying the brightness difference between the X930E and the X900E (It's almost double the brightness!) as 'not a main reason to get the X930E over the X900E is very misleading!' Since that is the main reason to get it over the X900E, that accompanied by dolby vision and the X1 EXTREME PROCESSOR. Everyone who knows about HDR and the requirements will tell you that


All you do in these threads is regurgitate. You don't ever bring any actual product experience, but you make recommendations all the time without have any product experience. OTOH, I have an X900e, and have watched it with plenty of sunlight coming into the room. As an owner, I can tell you that it is plenty bright enough.

You spit out specs, I base my statement on what I actually see with my own two eyes. YMMV.

My humble system:

Sony X900e; Sony UBP-X800; Pioneer Elite BDP-62FD universal blu-ray player; Denon 4300H AVR, Dual PSA S1801's; Monitor Audio Silver RX-6 mains, RX center, and RX surrounds; one pair NHT mini Atmos speakers; Home-built HTPC (Xeon E1230, 16gb RAM, Crucial M500 480gb SSD, GeForce 980Ti, Corsair CX600, CoolerMaster mini-ITX case)
sk373 is offline  
post #20 of 34 Old 06-22-2017, 04:39 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2017
Posts: 392
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 243 Post(s)
Liked: 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by sk373 View Post


All you do in these threads is regurgitate. You don't ever bring any actual product experience, but you make recommendations all the time without have any product experience. OTOH, I have an X900e, and have watched it with plenty of sunlight coming into the room. As an owner, I can tell you that it is plenty bright enough.

You spit out specs, I base my statement on what I actually see with my own two eyes. YMMV.
I have seen all the sets, from lower brightness sets to sets like the Z9D with the higher brightness, and i'm just someone who does thorough research before making a big purchase! So i don't know how seeing the x900e gives you the right to say this is enough brightness for HDR! I guess than everyone else got it wrong and youre the only one that got it right! I think you missed the whole point of HDR
sahil0909 is online now  
post #21 of 34 Old 06-22-2017, 04:55 PM
Advanced Member
 
sk373's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 549
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 266 Post(s)
Liked: 398
Quote:
Originally Posted by sahil0909 View Post
I have seen all the sets, from lower brightness sets to sets like the Z9D with the higher brightness, and i'm just someone who does thorough research before making a big purchase! So i don't know how seeing the x900e gives you the right to say this is enough brightness for HDR! I guess than everyone else got it wrong and youre the only one that got it right! I think you missed the whole point of HDR


No, I have not missed the point of HDR. Unlike you, I actually own an HDR set, with a UBP-X800 4K HDR player, and HDR discs. And I can tell you that the HDR performance of the X900e is excellent.

YMMV, but the OP wanted an opinion on whether the X930e is worth the $1,000 price premium. And while the peak brightness is indeed higher than the X900e, there's a real question as to how much difference there will be in common real-world use.

My humble system:

Sony X900e; Sony UBP-X800; Pioneer Elite BDP-62FD universal blu-ray player; Denon 4300H AVR, Dual PSA S1801's; Monitor Audio Silver RX-6 mains, RX center, and RX surrounds; one pair NHT mini Atmos speakers; Home-built HTPC (Xeon E1230, 16gb RAM, Crucial M500 480gb SSD, GeForce 980Ti, Corsair CX600, CoolerMaster mini-ITX case)
sk373 is offline  
post #22 of 34 Old 06-22-2017, 04:55 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
checker9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 2,004
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1389 Post(s)
Liked: 316
Quote:
Originally Posted by sahil0909 View Post
I have seen all the sets, from lower brightness sets to sets like the Z9D with the higher brightness, and i'm just someone who does thorough research before making a big purchase! So i don't know how seeing the x900e gives you the right to say this is enough brightness for HDR! I guess than everyone else got it wrong and youre the only one that got it right! I think you missed the whole point of HDR
As you are opining, brightness seems to win out in HDR.

In an HDR audience shoot-out last year, the KS9500 (US9800) won the audience vote, getting almost the same number of votes as both OLED TVs (LG and Panasonic) got combined, and it more than doubled the votes the LG E6 got. Also Dolby Vision clips were used if the TV could run them, so the higher peak brightness of a non-Dolby Vision TV still won out over an OLED demonstrating Dolby Vision content:

To avoid any single brand getting preferential treatment, the four TVs participating in this side-by-side comparison were arranged alphabetically in a slight arc from left to right:
LG OLED65E6 4K OLED;
Panasonic TX-65DX902B 4K LED LCD;
Samsung UE65KS9500 4K LED TV; and
Sony KD-75XD9405 4K LED LCD TV.

After excluding attendees with known affiliations to TV manufacturers from the voting process, 22 votes were cast for the best HDR TV (regardless of price) after attendees were asked to watch a variety of HDR content from 4K Blu-rays, Netflix streaming and Dolby Vision clips.

Here’s a breakdown of the votes:
Samsung KS9500: 9 votes
Panasonic DX902: 6 votes
LG E6: 4 votes
Sony XD94: 3 votes


http://www.hdtvtest.co.uk/news/shoot...1608054331.htm

Last edited by checker9; 06-22-2017 at 05:03 PM.
checker9 is offline  
post #23 of 34 Old 06-22-2017, 05:05 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2017
Posts: 392
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 243 Post(s)
Liked: 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by sk373 View Post


No, I have not missed the point of HDR. Unlike you, I actually own an HDR set, with a UBP-X800 4K HDR player, and HDR discs. And I can tell you that the HDR performance of the X900e is excellent.

YMMV, but the OP wanted an opinion on whether the X930e is worth the $1,000 price premium. And while the peak brightness is indeed higher than the X900e, there's a real question as to how much difference there will be in common real-world use.
I NEVER said the HDR performance of the X900E is bad!! All im saying is if you think that 800 nits of brightness is really good, what do you think would happen if you added another 800 nits on top of that? That's what they did with the X930E! And 800 nits of brightness is Alot of difference in real life content!! If you go and see the sets in the store, you will see the difference without the need of anyone pointing out which tv is which
sahil0909 is online now  
post #24 of 34 Old 06-22-2017, 05:07 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2017
Posts: 392
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 243 Post(s)
Liked: 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by checker9 View Post
As you are opining, brightness seems to win out in HDR.

In an HDR audience shoot-out last year, the KS9500 (US9800) won the audience vote, getting almost the same number of votes as both OLED TVs (LG and Panasonic) got combined, and it more than doubled the votes the LG E6 got. Also Dolby Vision clips were used if the TV could run them, so the higher peak brightness of a non-Dolby Vision TV still won out over an OLED demonstrating Dolby Vision content:

To avoid any single brand getting preferential treatment, the four TVs participating in this side-by-side comparison were arranged alphabetically in a slight arc from left to right:
LG OLED65E6 4K OLED;
Panasonic TX-65DX902B 4K LED LCD;
Samsung UE65KS9500 4K LED TV; and
Sony KD-75XD9405 4K LED LCD TV.

After excluding attendees with known affiliations to TV manufacturers from the voting process, 22 votes were cast for the best HDR TV (regardless of price) after attendees were asked to watch a variety of HDR content from 4K Blu-rays, Netflix streaming and Dolby Vision clips.

Here’s a breakdown of the votes:
Samsung KS9500: 9 votes
Panasonic DX902: 6 votes
LG E6: 4 votes
Sony XD94: 3 votes


http://www.hdtvtest.co.uk/news/shoot...1608054331.htm
That's true, Brightness is very important. I can't wait for the day OLED hits over 1000 nits! Those perfect blacks, without any pollution, with 1000 nits of peak brightness will blow minds!
sahil0909 is online now  
post #25 of 34 Old 06-22-2017, 06:08 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
checker9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 2,004
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1389 Post(s)
Liked: 316
Quote:
Originally Posted by sahil0909 View Post
That's true, Brightness is very important. I can't wait for the day OLED hits over 1000 nits! Those perfect blacks, without any pollution, with 1000 nits of peak brightness will blow minds!
They might be at a limit as far as current OLED technology. From this and other home theater forums, it seems the reports of burn-in with 2016 OLEDS is rising, yet not many reports on older OLEDs (2017s have not been out long enough to show a trend in burn-in problems.) The difference might be in the higher brightness levels of the 2016 sets compared to older OLED sets. The brighter light might be causing the increase of burn-in cases. If so, that might mean brightness on OLEDs is near physical constraint as far as being able to do it without damage to the pixel filters.
checker9 is offline  
post #26 of 34 Old 06-22-2017, 06:14 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2017
Posts: 392
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 243 Post(s)
Liked: 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by checker9 View Post
They might be at a limit as far as current OLED technology. From this and other home theater forums, it seems the reports of burn-in with 2016 OLEDS is rising, yet not many reports on older OLEDs (2017s have not been out long enough to show a trend in burn-in problems.) The difference might be in the higher brightness levels of the 2016 sets compared to older OLED sets. The brighter light might be causing the increase of burn-in cases. If so, that might mean brightness on OLEDs is near physical constraint as far as being able to do it without damage to the pixel filters.
Wasn't burn-in a bigger problem with Plasma? And those were no where near the brightness of today's OLEDs. Actually reports of burn in are quite few compared to those who have never experienced it. The biggest concern seems to be image retention and not burn in, and tests show the 2017 oled's to actually be better at this than the 2016 ones. Anyways i really do hope they figure out a way to advance OLEDs even more and get rid of the issues. Because it's simply a beauty to behold
sahil0909 is online now  
post #27 of 34 Old 06-22-2017, 06:26 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
checker9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 2,004
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1389 Post(s)
Liked: 316
Quote:
Originally Posted by sahil0909 View Post
Wasn't burn-in a bigger problem with Plasma? And those were no where near the brightness of today's OLEDs. Actually reports of burn in are quite few compared to those who have never experienced it. The biggest concern seems to be image retention and not burn in, and tests show the 2017 oled's to actually be better at this than the 2016 ones. Anyways i really do hope they figure out a way to advance OLEDs even more and get rid of the issues. Because it's simply a beauty to behold
Not sure, the burn-in message thread is growing on this forum and other home theater forums. There is an interesting trend where a poster will report no burn-in after extensive gaming/pc use/leaving images paused etc., then a week or two later posting that he does have burn-in and now that he saw it, he sees it in most content.

Anything on the 2017 is probably moot because they have not been out long enough to show the problems. It seems most of the burn-in cases are on TVs hitting 1000-2000 hours. Some people are even noticing that the black bars pixel areas, where on OLEDs the pixel are not used, are noticeably brighter on full screen content than the middle pixels on 2016 OLED that have logged over 1000 hours of movies on them. The hypothesis is that the pixels are aging so fast, that even after 1000+ hours, the middle pixels that are used in the movies look noticeably different than top and bottom pixels that where not used during those movies. The Sony OELD manual even warns against watching movies with black bars, recommending that you stretch the movie to not have black bars (the LG manual might also recommend that but I only saw the quote from the Sony manual.)

Both of those issues are why I recently returned a B6, on which I got a great deal. It had zero dead pixels and great uniformity but I was afraid of risking it (I would be sick if a year or so I had burn-in.) Also, during mean-time I would not have been able to enjoy most content as I would be worried it would cause a problem. Also, for HDR I was not overly impressed. My KS8000 has more of a "wow" look to HDR content that I did not get on the OLED. The OLED was fine, I just did not have the "wow" moments I had on KS8000 HDR content - again the brightness. Overall I preferred the uniform black levels, adn would have kept it if not for the burn-in risk but brightness really seems to be the key for HDR.

Last edited by checker9; 06-22-2017 at 06:30 PM.
checker9 is offline  
post #28 of 34 Old 06-22-2017, 06:33 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2017
Posts: 392
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 243 Post(s)
Liked: 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by checker9 View Post
Not sure, the burn-in message thread is growing on this forum and other home theater forums. There is an interesting trend where a poster will report no burn-in after extensive gaming/pc use/leaving images paused etc., then a week or two later posting that he does have burn-in and now that he saw it, he sees it in most content.

Anything on the 2017 is probably moot because they have not been out long enough to show the problems. It seems most of the burn-in cases are on TVs hitting 1000-2000 hours. Some people are even noticing that the black bars pixel areas, where on OLEDs the pixel are not used, are noticeably brighter on full screen content than the middle pixels on 2016 OLED that have logged over 1000 hours of movies on them. The hypothesis is that the pixels are aging so fast, that even after 1000+ hours, the middle pixels that are used in the movies look noticeably different than top and bottom pixels that where not used during those movies. The Sony OELD manual even warns against watching movies with black bars, recommending that you stretch the movie to not have black bars (the LG manual might also recommend that but I only saw the quote from the Sony manual.)

Both of those issues are why I recently returned a B6, on which I got a great deal. It had zero dead pixels and great uniformity but I was afraid of risking it (I would be sick if a year or so I had burn-in.) Also, during mean-time I would not have been able to enjoy most content as I would be worried it would cause a problem. Also, for HDR I was not overly impressed. My KS8000 has more of a "wow" look to HDR content that I did not get on the OLED. The OLED was fine, I just did not have the "wow" moments I had on KS8000 HDR content - again the brightness. Overall I preferred the uniform black levels, adn would have kept it if not for the burn-in risk but brightness really seems to be the key for HDR.
That's interesting.. i really hope they figure their stuff out and fix these issues man, spending over 2,000 on a TV with issues is crazy. Let's hope for something amazing next year
sahil0909 is online now  
post #29 of 34 Old 06-22-2017, 06:48 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
checker9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 2,004
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1389 Post(s)
Liked: 316
Quote:
Originally Posted by sahil0909 View Post
That's interesting.. i really hope they figure their stuff out and fix these issues man, spending over 2,000 on a TV with issues is crazy. Let's hope for something amazing next year
Note, I am more risk-averse than most, and odds are it will not happen, but as you wrote, I could not deal with getting an expensive TV and have it happen, so I did not want to risk it. Also, I would not be able to enjoy anything, worried that a channel logo, or gaming static images, or black bars would damage it. SO there was no point paying a higher price even if a better price. With a bias lighting, I do not notice blooming in actual content, other than black bars not being perfect, on my KS TV, but it would be nice to have a more uniform black TV but not worth that risk or higher price.
checker9 is offline  
post #30 of 34 Old 06-22-2017, 07:54 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
bobknavs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Danbury, CT, USA
Posts: 1,064
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 552 Post(s)
Liked: 447
Quote:
Originally Posted by sahil0909 View Post
(snip) According to the UHD premium alliance the minimum required brightness is 1000 nits. (snip)
The official certified premium UHD spec seems to not be available for free, but here's one version:

https://www.whathifi.com/advice/ultr...tvs-support-it

It may be worth quoting:

--TVs must also be capable of producing more than 90 per cent of the DCI P3 color standard and meet a certain brightness level (measured in nits).
--4K TVs must have either a 1000-nit peak brightness and less than 0.05 nits black level (to cater for the high brightness of LCD TVs),
--or a 540-nit peak brightness and less than 0.0005 nits black level (to include the generally dimmer, yet stonking black depth, of OLEDs).

So, OLEDs can be certified as premium if they exceed a 540 nit luminance. I wonder if this extends to FALD LCDs, as the blacks (over a relatively large patch, depending on the number of zones) can be made very black using the backlight.
bobknavs is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply LCD Flat Panel Displays

Tags
4k tv , atmos , hdr capable , usb playback

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off